Free Speech in the Age of Political Correctness

Kevin MacDonald is a retired California State University Professor of Psychology and the the editor of the Occidental Observer, a publication concerned with "white identity, white interests, and the culture of the West".

According to that well-known source of objective information, Trikipedia, MacDonald is "best known for writings that propagate a conspiracy theory which characterize Jewish behavior as a group evolutionary strategy."

Other sources readily accessed by Google take a similar line, describing MacDonald as an anti-Semite, white supremacist, conspiracy theorist, or to summarize, a mentally deranged and nasty piece of slime.

However, based on his scholarly treatise, The Culture of Critique, it would seem reasonable to suppose that MacDonald is not some racist nut, but a rational scholar examining the way in which diaspora Jews often interact with the people of their host nation.

Whether MacDonald's analysis is generally sound it is not my purpose here to consider, although having dipped into his major treatise, I can say that it proceeds in accordance with the normal methods of rational academic discourse and confirms much of what is apparent to the casual observer concerning Jewish beliefs, traditions, and modes of behavior.

It is naturally painful, therefore, for a person such as MacDonald to find themselves generally ostracized for their sincerely held and carefully weighed opinions on a subject to which they have devoted lengthy study.

Reflecting the painful social consequences of his academic pursuits, MacDonald recently published an article entitled: Ideas on maintaining relationships with the less committed in a dark age, wherein he states:

... Many of us are forced to deal with personal issues because of our political-cultural beliefs. A typical situation might be a wife or girlfriend—the great majority of activists on the dissident right are male—who is terrified of it becoming known that she is associated with someone who is shunned and socially ostracized. But of course, it may also be other family members or friends—a particularly painful experience. ...

Discussion of the article at the Unz Review raised the issue of American's constitutionally guaranteed right of free speech prompting the remark:

... This is comedy gold. First, that people believe that we still have freedom of speech. ...

In fact, Americans do still have the constitutional right of free speech. However, freedom of speech is a legal freedom, whereas freedom of action, whether in the form of speech or otherwise, is subject to both legal and social limitations.

Political correctness diminishes or eradicates the value of the legal right of free speech by imposing social control over speech, i.e., informal sanctions imposed by friends and family, or economic sanctions imposed by employers, state bureaucracies, political parties, etc.

The pervasive and uniformly PC impact of media, the propaganda dispensed by state-managed educational institutions, and the Google-style economic punishment of the expression of non-PC beliefs, ensures that the exercise of Freedom of Speech is a rare and often painful experience.

The result is a massive build up of resentment among the socially oppressed until something gives. In the UK, the working class, comprehensively betrayed by Phony Bliar's PC "New Labour" party --which deliberately flooded the working class areas of declining industrial towns with immigrants of an alien race, religion and culture, has defected in large numbers to a supposedly populist Johnson Tory Party.

The consequence of this reaction remains to be seen. But if the Johnson Government fails to deliver for Britain's working class the consequences may be be ugly in the extreme.

Meantime, the liberal left are turning up the invective against the working man. Hence the headline in that most disgusting of all self-hating white liberal newspapers, The Independent:

The antisemitic monster rising from the slime is not Corbynism – it is white nationalism

There you have the resort to hate speech direct in the cause of British national genocide through suppressed reproduction and mass replacement immigration.

The outcome? Civil War, anyone? Most Americans think it likely. Why should it not be likely in Britain too, where another civil war seems overdue.

Related: Joe Digenova: American coup d'etat:

Has the Sandy Hook investigator, Prof James Tracy, been targeted for total disruption of credibility by a drone named Jim Fetzer?

The best way to discredit those who point to evidence of a conspiracy against the public is to associate them with advocates of the wackiest conspiracy theories going. For instance the belief that on 9/11 the Twin Towers were brought down by space-based beam weapons, or that JFK was murdered by the Mafia or Fidel Castro, or both working in collaboration, or that Sandy Hook was the work of a Mossad assassination squad.

Professor James Tracy of Florida Atlantic University, who has raised important questions about the Sandy Hook Massacre, has now posted a letter from James Fetzer defending some of the most bizarre and factually unsupported theories about Sandy Hook, in particular, that a Mossad death squad was involved. In view of the, at present, complete absence of evidence of such involvement, such theories only bring discredit upon those who advance them and those who associate with those who advance them.

Perhaps Professor Tracy is playing a deep game,aiming ultimately to debunk those who promote nonsensical conspiracy theories to discredit plausible and probably theories. If so, we wish him luck. If not, we guess his credibility is permanently shot.

For information about the way in which credible conspiracy theories are discredited by association with ridiculous nonsense, see:

Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11

How Fetzer Aids Defenders of the Official Account

PostScript

Since writing the above, it has become clear from the comments on Prof Tracy's blog that Jim Fetzer, a veteran of extreme wacko conspiracy theories has, through his guest post, created rancor and dissension among Prof. Tracy's blog followers, leading to a vociferous debate about who, among the conspiracy theorists, is an anti-Semite.

My own last comments on Prof Tracy's blog, which though critical of Jim Fetzer were not irrational or hateful, have been censored. One has to conclude that the professor of Florida Atlantic University is either rather simple minded or that he has been hypnotized or blackmailed into making a travesty of his own inquiry into the Sandy Hook Massacre.

Post-Postscript

One of my comments on Prof. Tracy's MemoryHole blog post by James Fetzer has now been allowed. Specifically:

Discrediting By Association: Undermining the Case for Patriots Who Question 9/11.

While Professor Tracy, you may associate with whom you like, if you continually associate with those who propagate wacko conspiracy theories, many will draw the conclusion that your judgment about Sandy Hook and other matters is open to serious question.

This was followed by a trollish comment by a pontifical character posting under the name of Rev Dave, who states:

It sounds to me sir, like YOU have already made that decision – or maybe your employer made it and you’re just still here working that angle as well as you can? Seriously, if questions can somehow ‘hurt’ the story, then the story itself is shaky and won’t hold up, meaning there are genuine killers going free today, who need to be identified and prosecuted. If the ‘truth is out there’ already, then the questions can’t hurt, can they? So what is your real purpose or issue here?

A pretty feeble response for a vicar, it seemed to me, and thus prompted the following comment, which at this time of writing had yet to pass the censor.

The issue is not the questions being asked, the issue is the baggage that is being brought along with the questions. Also the wacky theories. For example:

"Most likely, Adam Lanza and his mother were killed the day before with Adam Lanza’s body picked up by police. He was attired in a SWAT outfit, including body armor, and stored in the school. "

"Most likely," indeed, except we ain't got one scrap of evidence.

LOL

Jim Fetzer has a history of crazy ideas advanced as "Most likely" (see the article I linked to above), which only discredits the intelligence of his adherents.

And, Rev. Dave, since you use the title Rev, would you mind telling us by which church you were ordained. I mean if the title is supposed to confer credibility, the name of the church is surely relevant.

And now Prof. Tracy has allowed another of my comments at the MemoryHole blog:

Jim Fetzer has done a great job, sewing rancor and dissension among the Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists and tarring most of them with the anti-Semite brush. Good work, Jim. But I guess as with my earlier comment James Tracy will delete this one.

In fact, Prof. Tracy did allow that one, with the following comment:

[Your] previous comment was not deleted, yet it appeared inflammatory and unproductive, and thus was withheld. One does not have time to “background” every post and the assertion here that James Fetzer is a sower of discontent and the one previous (“wacky conspiracy theories”) do not in my view hold up to serious scrutiny.

Which prompted me to point out that Jim Fetzer was a veteran wrecker of independent inquiry into possible state crimes, having successfully ousted Prof. Steven Jones, a key 9/11 researcher, from Scholars for 9/11 Truth and organization that Fetzer then made his own.

I am strongly inclined to believe that Prof. Tracy is what he appears, a decent academic undertaking a risky investigation for the sake of truth. But I fear that he has been targeted for total disruption of credibility by a drone named Jim Fetzer.

But we will see.

The Latest

Happily, Prof. Tracy has now approved all my comments, which naturally confirms my view that he's a sound fellow. But I will not test his patience for a while with further comments. I hope, though, that others who think it proper to ask questions when state authorities and the media offer a highly questionable account of policy shaping events, will visit Prof. Tracy's blog and provide constructive support.

And more from Aangirfan about the mysterious invisibility of Adam Lanza during the years preceding Sandy Hook.

See also:

Hate Week in America: Targeting Sandy Hook Truthers